A federal judge in Fort Worth, Texas, on Friday blocked a new Biden administration rule that would prohibit credit card companies from charging customers late fees higher than $8.

US District Judge Mark T. Pittman, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, granted a preliminary injunction to several business and banking organizations that allege the new rule violates several federal statutes.

These organizations, led by the right-leaning US Chamber of Commerce, sued the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau after the rule was finalized in March. The rule, which was set to go into effect Tuesday, would save consumers about $10 billion per year by cutting fees from an average of $32, the CFPB estimated.

  • madcaesar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    I want stories like this bombarded at the morons on here saying Biden does nothing and both sides are the same.

    This Trump fucker is actively fighting for mega corps.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      It doesn’t matter to them. They think all they have to say is “Genocide Joe” and they’ve made their argument.

      • BossDj@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Nah, the Trump base doesn’t give two shits about Israel/Palestine. And they’ll never know Biden ever tried. I’m pretty sure they’re still talking about the laptop

        • cygnus@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Those people aren’t Trump voters, they are tankies at best and accelerationists at worst (with a generous helping of foreign sockpuppets too)

          • barsquid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            They want Donald in office because it is better for China. They don’t give a shit about Uyghur genocide or the fact that “socialist” China is producing billionaires.

      • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yeah, because Donny will surely stand up for Gaza much more than Joe ever did…

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          They don’t like it when you point out that Trump moved the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem, tacitly declaring it to belong wholly to Israel. He’s made it very clear what he thinks about Palestine.

        • Delusional@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          And you know 100% that if Biden was against Israel and supported Gaza, they’d bitch and complain and say Biden supports terrorists. Bad faith arguments across the board coming from those worthless shitstains.

      • pop@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Bandwagoning tiny shit like “credit card fees” is not going to change the number of deaths he has funded. But that never was your concern tho, was it?

        It’s about “Biden does good thing for us so we can excuse a genocide he’s causing”?

        Come back when you grow up and you’re done circlejerking on petty little things that your team does.

      • circuscritic@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        “Look, I know Biden actively supports genocide. But if you point that out, then really it is you who is the bigger supporter of genocide. By not supporting Genocide Joe, you are actually a Trump voter.”

        Give me a break. Maybe you’re the problem if your satisfied supporting a party who’s political leanings are so flexible that the only metric they cling to is remaining slightly to the left of the GOP, no matter how far to the right that keeps pushing them.

        The Democrats are already a center right party. At this rate, when the GOP goes full National Socialist Workers Party, the Democrats will adopt the Tea Party’s politics.

        But hey, at least they’ll still be to the left of the GOP, right?

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          But hey, at least they’ll still be to the left of the GOP, right?

          Correct. They will be to the left of the outright fascists. And it’s that or the fascists. By voting for anyone else, you choose the fascists. Sorry, that’s reality.

          • circuscritic@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            No, the reality is that people like you are helping to craft that very future by refusing to stop supporting the Democrats for even a moment.

            Even if stopping for that moment is what is needed to turn the party back into a workers party, and not one that is entirely beholden to it’s donor class, because they know the rubes will vote for them no matter what they do.

            • VubDapple@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              If you are not inclined to want fascist leaders, and assuming you are a person and not a troll, how do you imagine ceasing to support the less fascist party during an election year will result in less fascism?

              • circuscritic@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                We are only driving in one direction. The GOP keeps their pedal to the floor, while the Democrats have been happy just to ease up the gas a little - but not slam on the brakes.

                You’re saying that it’s better to support the Democrats and delay the inevitable arrival at destination Facism.

                I’m saying if ever want to hope to flip a bitch, or even just find an off-ramp, the Democratic party has to be retrained on who they respond to. The only way to do that is to make them more responsive to their voters, then to their donors.

                When facing down the barrel of the unlimited donations and super PACS of their donor class, the only weapon we have is solidarity in not supporting them, until they learn.

                Taking a little medicine now, but with the chance to actually turn this car around, is worth the risk when the other option is just delayed full tilt facism, with occasional letting off the gas for the new Tea Party Democrats, if they aren’t already outlawed by that point.

                • theparadox@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  …and if they instead decide that the left cannot be depended on and start courting voters more to the right?

                  I honestly felt how you feel. I just don’t think it’s historically worked that way.

                  Push local reps to the left and Primary the centrists. I’m all for it… but going home because your guy isn’t on the ballot is playing a dangerous game right now.

                  If the country can handle a Republican win, then go back to staying home in protest. But I think, especially at this point in time, that a Trump win would spell the end of American democracy.

              • circuscritic@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                Vote for whoever you want.

                My responses were directed at people commenting, unprompted, about how anyone who doesn’t support Biden, or buy into his campaign messaging, are either closeted Trump supporters, tankies, or (my personal favorite) foreign socket puppet accounts i.e. Russian bots.

                Because obviously they can’t be lifelong Democrats who are fed up with current Democratic establishment and see the threat they pose if left unchanged - precisely because we NEED an actual strong leftwing workers party to stand against the GOP.

                So, again, you do whatever your conscience tells you.

                If your comfortable with a Democratic party that is already fully run by neoliberals, crushes leftists, and only moves further to the right each election, then keep supporting them. That’s on you.

                Myself, I am going to see which option the Democrats are MOST concerned with i.e. uncommitted vs blank vs a specific 3rd party candidate.

                I will also continue to support most of my local and statewide progressive candidates, because I do care, and I’m not whatever fantasy the Biden supporters have concocted so they can dismiss people like me without giving these idea any real thought.

    • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’m more willing to give Biden credit when he’s blocked by trump appointed judges than I am when he’s blocked in the senate by members of the party he nominally heads.

      • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        The Legislative Branch does not report to the Executive Branch, it checks it. If the Senate reported to the President, they wouldn’t be doing their job. Trump’s presidency was a good example of corruption of governmental checks and balances.

        • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          The Legislative Branch does not report to the Executive Branch, it checks it.

          Do they ever. And you may support legislators based solely on how reliably they kill progressive policy for you, but I don’t.

    • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      We don’t yet know if he actually did anything here or not, we will find out when the legal challenges are done. On one hand, it may survive, in which case something was actually accomplished, on the other hand, Biden may have wasted a whole bunch of people’s time and clogged up the courts even more than they already are.

      • forrgott@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        That’s a terrible argument. And love how you blame the obstructionism on the one being obstructed from accomplishing their goals.

        So, no, we have already seen the action. He did something. Will the sociopathic fascist a-holes in government overturn the action ALREADY TAKEN is what remains to be seen.

        • Reyali@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          First off, I totally agree the argument you responded to is bad and that Biden is driving toward the right goal.

          However, if we disambiguate the specific circumstance here, there is sometimes an argument to be made that the one being obstructed is the problem. Think about how many obviously illegal laws Republicans have pushed through. A recent example would be DeSantis’ “Stop WOKE” act trying to eliminate DEI training in companies. It so clearly goes against federal law about protected classes and was deemed unconstitutional because of the first amendment. I don’t think there’s any chance DeSantis actually believed this act was legal or would be allowed, he just wanted the brownie points of “hurr durr, own the libs.”

          There are so many cases of that kind of thing, and I think it’s absolutely fair to be critical of those whose laws are being obstructed when they initiate them in bad faith.

          However, like I said, that doesn’t apply in this situation; this law was not made in bad faith, and the Texas court is definitely the problem here. I only bring it up because “blaming the obstructionism on the one being obstructed” can sometimes be a legit argument.

      • 0110010001100010@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        WTF kind of logic is this? Are you saying he shouldn’t even try and just sit with his thumbs up his ass rather than try to accomplish good things because a court may block it? Should we all just throw our hands up and give up doing anything at all?

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I want stories like this bombarded at the morons on here saying Biden does nothing

      Biden putting up rules and then failing to enforce them because of a predictable Texas appeallate court issuing a predictable injunction amounts to nothing.

      Biden had the opportunity to pack the courts back in 2021 and… didn’t. He still has the opportunity, right now, while he has a Senate majority.

      This isn’t just a Biden problem. I could name a dozen of Senate Dems who paved the way for a stacked court, going back to the McCain-friendly Democrats caving to Frist’s Nuclear Option back in 2005 (senior senator from Delaware whatsisface notwithstanding).

      But this is a kind of learned liberal helplessness, when a guy like Biden can throw you an empty headline and get “See! He tried to do something! We just need to give him 2009 supermajorities before they’ll work!” Meanwhile, if any Republican wins any branch of any level of government, that’s all they need to eviscerate democracy forever.

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Good ol’ Christian Right wanting a Christian Nation while defending banks and ignoring their Jesus who destroyed the money lenders’ tables.

    • Huckledebuck@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      The one time Jesus got angry. Go figure…

      Edit: on record. I guess he could’ve had some pretty terrible 2s, or something, that we don’t know about.

    • Ranvier@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Infuriating thing was, this judge was clearly shopped for, but he kicked the case to the DC district Court instead of Texas. He himself even accused the banks of venue shopping in the ruling when he did so! Unfortunately the DC district court sent it right back and said he still had to take the case. He should have recused himself at that pont anyways given his stock holdings and things, but he now decides to reward the the banks for their venue shopping he’s clearly aware of. Judiciary is rotten.

      https://www.yahoo.com/news/texas-judge-moves-fee-case-232103686.html

      • breetai@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        He just put an injunction in place which is common. It just means the case has to be decided first.

        If he’s accusing them of venue shopping. I suspect he’s going to rule against them.

        • Ranvier@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          The legal standard for an injunction also includes a “likelihood of success on the merits.” The judge agrees with the banks in his ruling that they are likely to succeed on the case. So unfortunately the injunction is a signal there is a good chance he rules in the banks favor ultimately. Though he spends a bunch of the ruling just talking about how he’s mad this case was kicked back to him. He only spends like a page talking about if the legal standard for injunction has been met or not.

          https://www.consumerfinancemonitor.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/14/2024/05/US_DIS_TXND_4_24cv213_d230938971e185_OPINION_ORDER_Before_the_Court_is_Plaintiffs_Motio.pdf

          • Billiam@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Not just likelihood of success, but also whether any irreparable harm could occur while the case is being decided, in the event the case favors the plaintiffs. In this case, if card companies are only allowed to collect $8 while the case is ongoing, and then a judge ruling they are allowed to collect more than that, means there’s a monetary loss that will have happened. Now I wouldn’t be crying if credit card companies are forced to stop ripping people off, and absolutely fuck the Chamber of Commerce, but that’s what it is.

            • Ranvier@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              Yes I agree, but it doesn’t just have to meet some of those criteria to get an injunction, it has to meet all those criteria, including likelihood of success. They can’t just argue irreparable harm only if the judge thinks they’re unlikely to succeed. The judge seems to agree with them in that section of the ruling that he thinks that the rule is likely unconstitutional. And conservative judges have been pretty hostile to the consumer financial protection bureau in general. I’m not holding my breath, at least not for this judge, but maybe ultimately on appeal the cfpb will still succeed in the end.

  • SeattleRain@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    The next president needs to pack the Federal court benches. I am getting so tired of right wingnuts upending democracy with these BS rulings.

    • sparkle@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      This kind of stuff is absolutely the number one failure of Democrats. They want to play fair and by the rules, so when there’s opposition to their appointments they just lie down and accept it until the Republicans get exactly who they want. Meanwhile the Republicans will lie, cheat, and slander their way to anything they want, including getting ultra-conservatives in on positions that aren’t supposed to be political.

      Biden’s been way better in this regard which is part of what makes him way better than previous Democrat presidents. But I still don’t have high hopes for “the party of compromise” in getting progressives in these kinds of positions. In particular, we all remember what happened at the end of Obama’s presidency with supreme court judges and Roe v Wade.

      • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Democrats use “fair and by the rules” as an excuse for failing at playing politics. It was clear what was going to happen. Nobody did anything except the Republicans who capitalized everything everywhere for a decade. Democrats and liberals are still unaware what happened

        • lennybird@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          You guys are missing an essential point — conservatives control the narrative.

          • From Fox News blowing MSNBC and CNN out of the water in ratings
          • Right-wing talk radio pioneered by Rush Limbaugh
          • Indoctrination Centers (churches) across America…

          Conservatives LONG won the information war.

          What does this mean? Republicans can do no wrong while Democrats are held to an infinitely higher standard and anything they do is hammered home to the ignorant, uneducated average American FAR greater than what Democrats can do to the right.

          Things have marginally improved in the last 10 years as the recognition of Botherism has expanded, but let’s not forget: (1) Republicans still have the majority of the money, (2) Republicans won huge with Citizens United and SpeechNow decisions, and (3) they’re assholes and assholes will beat you with experience.

          Catering to a broader coalition on the left that is also far less confrontational by the nature of being more empathetic is also something that we as a group must come to terms with. Our rallying points have never been blind loyalty and fear-mongering like the Right uses with the literally biochemically-altered conservative brain (studies on MRI testing prove this). We gather strength through vision, hope, solidarity, love — hence why Obama’s Hope & Change message in 2008 was pure genius.

          Though I will say I do agree there is a certain type of character we can seek to promote on the left, like AOC, like Bernie, like Warren, and like even Swalwell. Someone not afraid to push the bully back. Hopefully we learned a big lesson from Obama’s era of capitulation and seeing his hand get smacked down over and over as he tried to reach across the aisle.